A fun format that a couple of friends and I put together designed for 3-4 players. We were thinking of a way for multiple people can all play against one another. I think you'll find that the 'royal rumble' is a fitting name.

To start out, everthing is played on the rattatak arena map (the asajj map pack, I think). Everything is played in the arena floor it's considered wall all the way around. The 4 doors are your phase in points (I'll get to that a little later). Everyone makes three seperate 100 pnt (or under) teams of 2 characters each with no faction restriction (so 6 figures total). Unique rules still apply. You may only have 1 uniquely named character amongst all 6 of your characters. IE, if you have Han G.H. in 1 of your squads you can not have another Han in any other of your teams. Everything is played on the interior of the arena, doors are considered closed for the whole game and no one may exit the arena in anyway. Doors are your starting/phase in point. Roll for set up. Highest roll chooses door, second highest chooses second, etc... Choose 1 of your squads, all players reveal their first squads at the same time and set up with both characters adjacent to your phase in door in the same order your phase in door was chosen. Your other two squads can enter later in the game. Roll init. Winner chooses who goes first, play proceeds to the left. (clockwise) Each player will only activate 1 character per phase. When any players team of 2 is defeated, that character can phase in his next team at the start of next init. (players may choose either 1 of their remaining teams). Player collects points equal to the characters point cost that he or she defeated. Once a players final character is defeated, he or she is out of the game and shall add up there total points scored. When only 1 player remains he or she receives points equal to the point cost total of all their undefeated characters, including those who may not have been phased in. Winner is the player with the highest point total. Tie breaker goes to the player with the last defeated character of the players tied.

Special Rules:

- targeting: every player may target the nearest character of each players squad. Adjaceny still trumps.

- Emplacement: characters with emplacement must set up with its entire base within 6 squares of that players phase in door.

- Master Tacticion and Tacticion +(#) work as normal.

- lasting effects: (ie - dark force spirit, impulsive abilitys, etc...) lasting effects only apply to the characters currently on the board at the time the ability takes effect.

- additional characters: no additional characters may be added to the board for any squad. ( reinforcements, reserves, alchemy, dismount, etc...). Abilitys that cause characters to switch teams are allowed. ( betrayal, internal strife, turn to the dark side, master of pain, etc...).

- defeating own characters: if you defeat your own character due to repulse, grenades, use the force, etc... All other players split that characters points. (rounded down).

- Bombad Gungan: if bombad gungan cause you to target a different enemy. The player doing the attacking/targeting will get the points if that enemy is defeated. If bombad gungan causes you to target yourself thus resulting in your players defeat all other players will split those points (see defeating own characters above).

- force suppression: In the event of more than one character with force suppression on the board at the same time, you will still only have to pay 1 extra force as this will fall under the general rule of stacking. A character can't be affected by the same ability multiple times unless it specifically says "this ability stacks" (which force suppression does not).

[Game going to time] We should all know by now that if you are the last man standing in a game that ends BEFORE time, you add the points of the characters you have left (even those that may not have been on the board yet).Well in the event of a game going to time, players still remaining, add ONLY THE POINTS FROM THIER CHARACTERS IN PLAY. We are trying to push aggression and action here, if we have 4 guys dancing around and still only on their 1st or 2nd duo then there is not a lot of conflict going on, so to repeat in a game that goes to time players remaining can only add the points from their characters in play.

Updated 7-13-2012.

_________________"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."-urbanshmi2-

Last edited by sthlrd2 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:34 pm, edited 8 times in total.

If you wanted to vary it up a bit, you could also use the Geonosis Arena, which is conveniently also symetrical, and which also has 4 doors. The only difference with that map is that it doesn't have any significant terrain that blocks LOS, which Rattatak Arena does.

_________________"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks

If you wanted to vary it up a bit, you could also use the Geonosis Arena, which is conveniently also symetrical, and which also has 4 doors. The only difference with that map is that it doesn't have any significant terrain that blocks LOS, which Rattatak Arena does.

I think the Geonosis Arena is actually a bit smaller than the Rattatak arena, too.

I think you explained it just fine. Sounds pretty cool. I'll have to give this a try sometime.

I'm one of the guys that plays this format with Jake (sthlrd2). It's one of the only 3 player formats I have played that is still fun. It's a great format to play with an odd number of guys, so nobody has to sit out. I endorse this format!

Also what we've been playing that wasn't mentioned - as far as targeting rules - you can target the closest of EITHER squad if you have no enemy adjacent. In other words, as long as you're not based, you have an option to attack either enemy squad

Good point Tim, I forgot to mention that. Yes you can pick what squad you want to atk assuming your not adjacent and pick the closest enemy from either squad to atk but stealth still comes into play so you might only have one choice anyways.

Did I just make it more complicated than it is. I have a tendacy to do that so if my post is confusing then just ignore it.

_________________"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."-urbanshmi2-

I taught this to 3 more people this weekend at the Kokomo regional and they all seemed to love it. As always it was interesting to see some of the different combinations of squads that people come up with and they posed some good questions.

If you kill your own team member with repulse or somthing of the sort, do you get the points for your own guy? Yes and no. You split the points between the players.

Can you run 2 versions of the same character in the same squad? (example: boba bh and boba enforcer)? This one I had to think about for a little while. Normally with this being the kind of fun format that it is, I don't think I would have a problem with it and although it could be fun, I have to rule no in this situation because it just feels to weird to me. Not that it isn't weird to see durge jh and Jedi exile together or reven and anakin fs together but I feel that 2 of the same character in the same squad takes it to a different level that I don't really like so good question but I will have to rule no.

Everyone that played has loved this format and has had a lot of fun doing it. So I hope that if you have read this post, that you give it a try because you won't be let down.

I would love to go to gen con and teach others this great format but it looks as if I won't be able to attend this year which really sux, so I would like to ask the people that have played this format to teach it to others (if you have time of course, I know how crazy gen con can be).

_________________"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."-urbanshmi2-

Jake and Tim, thanks for posting this format. It looks quite promising. I could tell teh folks that were playing it while the championships went on were having a good time. I am going to put it into the rotation for the Lafayette crew.

Question for those who have played this: Do you think it goes by quick enough to play for a regular tournament, 50 min time limit, etc, or do you think its a bit too much to try to get done in that timeframe?

Also, and i apologize if this is already listed someplace else for this, but can you use the same character in more than one of the 'squads'? Could I use Boba Merc Comm + Kreia as pair 1, and then Boba Merc + Obi in pair 2?

If you knew you were going to play this format and everyone already had there squads ready then yes I do think you can get it done in an hour. It takes more time when people are picking and changing squads and finding cards and minis. Snake drafts could still work if people have numorus squads ready. Of course it takes longer when explaning and teaching to first timers of the format.

As far as your other question is concerned about different versions of characters in different squads. Example: boba merc and obi jm (squad 1) Boba mc and kreia (squad 2) Darth caedus and boba enforcer (squad 3)I would not have a problem with that at all. That would be acceptable. In fact if I remember correctly I had gen sky in one squad and ani champion of nelvaan in another before. Remember squads don't have to be 100 even. They can be less than 100. One of my favorite squads to run in this is naga sadow and cay qel-droma.

Leshipy's question about when your 2nd team phases in. They can atk. When one of your squads is defeated your second squad phases in at the start of next init roll. So if you have enemies right by your starting spot when your first squad was defeated. You phase in and then roll init. If you win init you can atk right away. One of the fun stratagies involved in this format is deciding if you want to defeat an enemy when your by there starting point.Did I forget to explain that in the original post. I'll have to double check that and change if necessary.

_________________"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."-urbanshmi2-

We've never really had a problem with people ganging up on one another. At key points when it looks as if one person is looking strong and pulling ahead, then yes but it backfires so fast. If you were teaming up with team b to go against team c because theay looked strong if team b has an good opportunity to kill you he'll take it to get the points. And with those points team b might have an edge and start looking strong. Everything changes so fast that you don't really run into that problem. It might seem like it but after a few times of playing you'll see what I mean.

Did I explain the scoring?

_________________"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."-urbanshmi2-

Yea, you said to keep track of kill points, and last person standing adds points of surviving pieces to their total, in case of a tie.

The part that confused me was further into this thread you said that if you kill one of your own pieces, such as being within the blast of a repulse, etc, that the players split the points.Did you mean just the two opponents split the points, or all three players?

We played this format last night with 3 of us, and it was a load of fun! We played on Rattatak (as suggested), with 1 activation per phase (as suggested), and with 3 squads each (as suggested). We actually did two things differently, though:

1. We tracked points by how much damage a piece did. Therefore, when my Jango BH did 60 dmg to Phil's Emperor Palpatine, I gained 60 pts (for simplicity we divided by 10). And then when Palpy zapped Nick's Boba BH, Phil gained 30 pts, and so on. And so, when it was Boba BH's turn, he stopped to ask who had the most HP left (my IG-88 Assassin Droid), and then proceeded to disintegrate him for 100 pts...lol. We found that this kept us from playing with the "I'm not going to attack until I can make the kill" mindset, and so the game progressed quite well. I would suggest this method of keeping score as a possible method for consideration in the future; it certainly seems to fit with the "Royal Rumble" feel, where you just want to get out there and lay down some hurt as fast as possible.

2. We took the actual initiative rolls as the turn order for that round. That is, if I rolled a 19, Nick a 14, and Phil a 7, then the turn order for that round was me-Nick-Phil. Next turn is could be Phil-Nick-me if the dice went that way. This method of doing init added an element of un-predictability to the game, which was refreshing. It did remove some flexibility from the person who won init, who would ordinarily be able to make someone else go first, but we found that in every single case, we all wanted to go first anyway, so that we could do that last bit of damage before our 20hp piece was killed off.

Anyway, we decided that we'd definitely be playing this format again in the future. Thanks for posting it! (and yes, your instructions were fine )

_________________"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks

Good, glad everyone liked it. What were some of the squads people used? Actually that method of scoring is smthn we played around with at first then changed it. We found that you switched up who you were atacking more often and kept everyone guessing and scared of everyone else. And also there is a difference in what kind of squads people play. Your always trying to find a way to synergise with your other squads. You want your next squad to be able to continue what your first squad started and take it to different degree to mix it up so your opponent has to guess what is going on. It adds to the straagty of making your squads. Which there is espicially after you play it a few times. In all the times I played I am always low scoring at the beginning and killing everything in site at the end. I try and pick smthn that can do some damage but more or less screw with others squads first then pick smthin with heavy damage and good def as a second squad. For my last squad I pick smthn with better than avg damage but high survivability and it works well. People are always guessing with me and I'm always one of the last squads around so I end up being right there in points. Now I don't always win but it's the stratagy I try to stick with and it does well. With your style of scouring, we always just took fast and heavy damage squads. I guess it's just a different stratagy. Both of which work fine, we just had more fun with finding a stratagy with the way we chose.But good to hear you had fun and will continue to try it out.Thanx for posting it.

Oh and to the question above about killing your own piece with repulse or smthn of the sort. All players split. So 3-4 depending on how many were playing. I was toying wth the idea of changing it to splitting it with whoever was involved with the damage done so if I did repulse hurting a fig from squad b and killing a fig from squad c as well as killing one of my own pieces then my squad and squads b and c would split but not d as he was no where to be found in the action and not involved. I feel as if it would push action more among all players but not sold on the idea yet.

_________________"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."-urbanshmi2-

I hear where you're coming from with regards to scoring, and maybe we'll do it that way next time. The score and win/loss factor wasn't really all that big for us...we were just having a blast using this new format and seeing how much damage our pieces could do before they died. One thing I think we'll stick with for sure is our method of determining initiative order, because it made every round different.

_________________"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks

We played this format last night with 3 of us, and it was a load of fun! We played on Rattatak (as suggested), with 1 activation per phase (as suggested), and with 3 squads each (as suggested). We actually did two things differently, though:

1. We tracked points by how much damage a piece did. Therefore, when my Jango BH did 60 dmg to Phil's Emperor Palpatine, I gained 60 pts (for simplicity we divided by 10). And then when Palpy zapped Nick's Boba BH, Phil gained 30 pts, and so on. And so, when it was Boba BH's turn, he stopped to ask who had the most HP left (my IG-88 Assassin Droid), and then proceeded to disintegrate him for 100 pts...lol. We found that this kept us from playing with the "I'm not going to attack until I can make the kill" mindset, and so the game progressed quite well. I would suggest this method of keeping score as a possible method for consideration in the future; it certainly seems to fit with the "Royal Rumble" feel, where you just want to get out there and lay down some hurt as fast as possible.

I am one of the folks who has been playtesting this with Jake (sthlrd2), and so I have a good feel for this format.

We tried this scoring method for about a minute. Here's what I don't like about it - What about healing? What about Regeneration? What about self inflicted damage? Also, it just gets minatinous. I don't see why it's a problem to wait for the kill - it adds another layer of strategy.

thereisnotry wrote:

. . .2. We took the actual initiative rolls as the turn order for that round. That is, if I rolled a 19, Nick a 14, and Phil a 7, then the turn order for that round was me-Nick-Phil. Next turn is could be Phil-Nick-me if the dice went that way. This method of doing init added an element of un-predictability to the game, which was refreshing. It did remove some flexibility from the person who won init, who would ordinarily be able to make someone else go first, but we found that in every single case, we all wanted to go first anyway, so that we could do that last bit of damage before our 20hp piece was killed off.

I was thinking about this - I don't think it matters which way you do it with three people. It is equally random to have someone go first, then second place roll goes second and third goes third - as compared to someone goes first and depending on odd or even go clockwise or counter clockwise from there. The whole point is whoever wins does not necessarily have control over who goes second (and therefore by default third). So with your method, if I win, then I go first, and the person to my left will go next or last depending on if they got the next highest or not. With our method If I win and I go first, then the person to my left will go next or last depending on if I rolled odd or even. So it's just a different random factor that determines it - it doesn't really matter either way.

The reason we made the scoring method vs just last man standing is we wanted to reward agression. If it was just last man standing the best strategy would be just to hide. With the scoring, you are awarded for kills, and get a bonus (your own figs points) if you ARE the last man standing. In virtually evey game we've had - the most aggressive player (who also plays smart) wins.

Bottom line is this - the reason I love this format is it's the only 3 player format that I have seen work. Any other game I have played 3 player is with 2 vs 1 where one player operates 2 armies, so it's really 4 player. -OR- Someone ends up monkey in the middle and gets crushed. There are inherent balances in this game where it benefits everyone to not crush the monkey in the middle, but go after the leader.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum